Vellinge golf players can appeal a unique climate judgment.

Smoke after the seven-year battle over the barrier could hardly be established until a warring party went into counterattack.

On Thursday, the decision was announced that the Municipality of Vellinge could build the two-mile-long wall around Falsterboee in an attempt to save the area from being eradicated by extreme waves and floods.

The threat of the sea, a deadly cocktail of high sea levels and storms, endangers 21,000 inhabitants and property values ​​of SEK 60 billion.

At stake is the whole future of Skanör-Falsterbo, one of Sweden’s most important seaside resorts, as well as the favorite of businessmen during the summer with the Falsterbo Horse Show cream on the mash.

But while the decision of the Land and Environment Court in Växjö is being held by the municipal council Carina Wutzler (M), the president of the Falsterbo Golf Club, Peter Marcusson, is considering an appeal.

“Offering beaches”

– The verdict is unfortunate. External protection would have been a longer-term solution. Then we could have preserved natural values, real estate, golf, beaches and walking trails, says the president of Sweden’s third oldest golf club.

Peter Marcusson warns that the lack of external protection, which the Environment Court has rejected, can have significant negative economic consequences when the beaches around Skanör are “slaughtered”.

– Bird watchers, golfers, beach visitors who come here and spend a lot of money on restaurants, hotels and other commercial activities; They don’t come here for the sake of buildings.

Vista hides worries

The draft for the internal protection wall is expected to reach around SEK 200 million. Vellinge now plans to apply for money from the MSB, the Social Protection and Preparedness Agency and the EU.

80 properties are expected to have the wall in place. More than 30 private owners and local golf clubs have previously submitted comments with comments to the Environmental Court.

Some of them were concerned with obscured views, others with greater transparency as walking paths were erected, some with less market value.

Accommodation outside the embankment should not appeal

Homeowners with houses that fall off the embankment are also critical.

One of the golf club’s neighbors, Kristina Björling, whose mother has her home outside the planned refuge, says that the consequences for those who have properties and activities between internal protection and the sea are not sufficiently investigated.

Although her mother’s property is located just outside the shelter, she is not considered owner. You can be without compensation if you appeal against future decisions.

“We think you should be able to participate in the case on the same terms as other concerned landlords,” says Kristina Björling.

Private owners are getting lost in the wall

But there are owners who have managed to win the battle against the barrier.

Comments and protests by a private property owner have led the environmental court to reject the municipality’s refuge plans in a small part of northern Ljunghusen. Now there is a gap that the municipality must find a solution.

But that headache can be taken over by the municipal council Carina Wutzler (M) later.

This is a great day for Vellinge

I am very happy. This is a great day for Vellinge. The trial is largely positive for the Vellinge municipality. We have been working on this for many years, she says.

Then, the municipality must review the compensatory measures, the areas of establishment and the protection design.

The Environmental Court does not agree with the intrusion of nature.

There is disagreement among members of the environmental court over whether the approved embankment will generate too much intrusion into natural protective areas.

Falsterbo Golf Club President Peter Marcusson warned that the dunes will be sacrificed in the municipality’s plans as they fall off the embankment.

Wutzler disagrees.

– There are different perspectives on this. Quilts get a natural replenishment from nature. The court ruled that external protection would mean further interference with nature in general and affect wildlife and plant life in general, she says.